Capital Record (National Review)

Veronique De Rugy’s phenomenal article

David chimes in this week on the U.K. tribunal ruling that an employee was constructively terminated by having their desk moved, but more importantly, on the absurdity of the whole thing. When we ask disinterested third parties like the state to mediate disputes over furniture between employees and employers, we are doing great damage to another party not involved in chair-gate -- and that party is the subject of today’s Capital Record.

David sounds off on class warfare targeted at private equity firms daring to buy 0.06 percent of homes, and how counterproductive it is to the cause of a free and virtuous society to be going after the wrong people, for the wrong things, all the time.

"How the Right Sold Out"

If our goal is a monetary policy that minimizes interventions and distortions in the marketplace and most optimally allows capital to find its most efficient use, the last thing we should want is a Fed that is less independent and more captive to political whims and desires. David explains his various criticisms of Jerome Powell this week, but points out how we make things much worse, not better, if we believe it a good idea for the Fed to be a pawn of the president. In this case, it is counterproductive; for future precedent, it is downright dangerous.

This is a remedial course in how banking works, the tension between deposit rates and borrowing rates, and the way in which freedom and virtue are cultivated by true relationship banking. An episode you won’t want to miss!

Time for businesses to return to their essential purpose

Be Good Bankers: The Economic Interpretation of Matthew's Gospel, with a Fresh Translation

David unpacks the economic message of President Trump on so-called Liberation Day.

David wants the CFPB dismantled, and he thinks Russ Vought’s philosophy at OMB about deregulation is the right one. But did Vought use a really bad example of “weaponization” this weekend, and are some bad actors bad examples for good deregulation? David unpacks this dilemma of freedom and virtuousness in a quick, needed diatribe.

David looks at the wildest week in global financial markets in the last five years in the context of first principles – how the administration’s choice to lump allies in with adversaries hurt their cause – and how the need to properly define terms and understand basic economic concepts matters.

David makes the case that there are some arguments that are better than others for protectionist economic policy, even if none of them are persuasive, but there are none so counterproductive and misguided as merely calling your ideological opponents “globalists.” If the argument in classical economics against government intervention via protective tariffs is that they hurt American exporters, they hurt American importers, and they hurt American consumers, then the vocalizing of opposition can hardly be connected to “globalism.” For those who play this game, the intent is not to make a coherent argument at all, but to obfuscate, poison the well, and substitute innuendo in place of argument. For those who care for the American worker, we must do better.

Does one need to convert their business success to charitable endeavors to create a “lasting Kingdom legacy”? Or can we say with conviction that our efforts in the marketplace are lasting, are meaningful, and, in fact, are vitally important? David goes after a well-intentioned but deeply misguided sentiment about business vs. philanthropy, and in so doing lays out a vision for economics that gets to the heart of what this podcast is about.

With so much talk circulating that Americans need to be deathly afraid of a “strong dollar,” David takes on recent comments from Stephen Miran, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, suggesting that a strong dollar is really unfair to Americans. Underlying some of these recent allegations about dollar supremacy is a familiar crisis of responsibility. It is time to set the record straight.

David talks about all the things that are right in the dichotomy between the “stock market” and the “real economy,” but then goes into all the things that are wrong – namely, that 99% of the time someone is making this distinction, they are doing it wrong, for the wrong reasons, in the wrong way. Understanding what public equity prices measure versus what broad economic data measures is a good thing, but pitting capital against labor is called “Marxism” – and it can be deadly wrong.

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/jpmorgan-ceo-dimon-derides-in-office-work-pushback-demands-efficiency-2025-02-13/

https://www.barrons.com/articles/jamie-dimon-leaked-audio-jpmorgan-return-to-office-7064ee64

David takes on tariffs today in advance of the big April 2 announcements everyone is expecting from the Trump administration. David’s expectations? No clarity at all -- an ongoing chaos -- and a fever swamp dream for lobbyists.